| From: | Ben <bench(at)silentmedia(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: changing the /tmp/ lock file? |
| Date: | 2007-06-13 18:36:36 |
| Message-ID: | Pine.LNX.4.64.0706131133070.27105@localhost.localdomain |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
Why would that be a problem if each is configured to listen on different
addresses?
But maybe a better question to ask would be how people are doing failover
in the case where you have two servers, each handling a seperate set of
data and acting as backup for each other. I fully expect things to go
slower during failover periods, but in my case, that's better than
doubling my hardware.
On Wed, 13 Jun 2007, Tom Lane wrote:
> Ben <bench(at)silentmedia(dot)com> writes:
>> I'm trying to impliment an automatic failover system, and am running into
>> the problem that when I try to start multiple postgres clusters on the
>> same box, postgres will not start if /tmp/.s.PGSQL.5432.lock exists. Can I
>> change the file it's looking for via an option? Nothing seemed obvious
>> from a quick review of the docs, short of (presumably) changing the port
>> number, which I don't want to do.
>
> That lock file exists specifically to keep you from doing that (ie,
> having more than one postmaster listening on the same port). Trying
> to defeat the lock is not a good idea.
>
> regards, tom lane
>
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andrus | 2007-06-13 18:40:38 | Re: how to speed up query |
| Previous Message | Frank Wittig | 2007-06-13 18:35:04 | Re: pg_xlog - files are guaranteed to be sequentialy named? |